Related Content

Cr Bull said that to approve the development (which it had at first rejected before the developer appealed), the DAP "erroneously" applied discretionary powers in a way clearly not intended by the council's planning scheme.

Unlike developers, the City of Bayswater has no ability to appeal a DAP decision and neither do residents.

Advertisement

At its meeting last night, Bayswater Council resolved to write to Planning Minister John Day and Attorney-General Michael Mischin outlining concerns with DAPs and requesting a systems review, Cr Bull said.

It also resolved to amend town planning rules to ensure that, in future, at least one of the two councillors on the DAP would have to vote yes for a development for it to go ahead, thus removing the three 'industry' panellists' ability to outvote councillors.

"We will be considering this safeguard because of the situation we faced," the council said.

"But the problem is in the system and that needs to be addressed, as opposed to all councils having to revisit their town planning schemes in fear that the provisions will be erroneously applied."

Cr Bull has called for a balance of representation on each DAP, meaning at least three local councillors are present to balance the three industry panellists so that community concerns can be addressed.

In Bayswater's case, the town planning scheme states the discretion can be applied only when a development is consistent with the amenity of the locality, and the non-compliance will not have an adverse effect upon inhabitants.

The three 'industry' panellists voted to apply the discretion and allow the seven storeys, despite 62 residents objecting to it, plus a 500-signature petition opposing the development, and only 19 submissions in support of it.